Adapting a Traumatic Brain Injury Goals-of-Care Decision Aid for Critically Ill Patients to Intracerebral Hemorrhage and Hemispheric Acute Ischemic Stroke.

OBJECTIVES: Families in the neurologic ICU urgently request goals-of-care decision support and shared decision-making tools. We recently developed a goals-of-care decision aid for surrogates of critically ill traumatic brain injury patients using a systematic development process adherent to the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. To widen its applicability, we adapted this decision aid to critically ill patients with intracerebral hemorrhage and large hemispheric acute ischemic stroke. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: Two academic neurologic ICUs. SUBJECTS: Twenty family members of patients in the neurologic ICU were recruited from July 2018 to October 2018. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We reviewed the existing critically ill traumatic brain injury patients decision aid for content and changed: 1) the essential background information, 2) disease-specific terminology to "hemorrhagic stroke" and "ischemic stroke", and 3) disease-specific prognosis tailored to individual patients. We conducted acceptability and usability testing using validated scales. All three decision aids contain information from validated, disease-specific outcome prediction models, as recommended by international decision aid standards, including careful emphasis on their uncertainty. We replaced the individualizable icon arrays graphically depicting probabilities of a traumatic brain injury patient's prognosis with icon arrays visualizing intracerebral hemorrhage and hemispheric acute ischemic stroke prognostic probabilities using high-quality disease-specific data. We selected the Intracerebral Hemorrhage Score with validated 12-month outcomes, and for hemispheric acute ischemic stroke, the 12-month outcomes from landmark hemicraniectomy trials. Twenty family members participated in acceptability and usability testing (n = 11 for the intracerebral hemorrhage decision aid; n = 9 for the acute ischemic stroke decision aid). Median usage time was 22 minutes (interquartile range, 16-26 min). Usability was excellent (median System Usability Scale = 84/100 [interquartile range, 61-93; with > 68 indicating good usability]); 89% of participants graded the decision aid content as good or excellent, and greater than or equal to 90% rated it favorably for information amount, balance, and comprehensibility. CONCLUSIONS: We successfully adapted goals-of-care decision aids for use in surrogates of critically ill patients with intracerebral hemorrhage and hemispheric acute ischemic stroke and found excellent usability and acceptability. A feasibility trial using these decision aids is currently ongoing to further validate their acceptability and test their feasibility for use in busy neurologic ICUs.

Factors associated with PrEP adherence among MSM living in Jackson, Mississippi.

Understanding the determinants of pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) adherence is integral to reducing HIV incidence in the United States, especially for those at highest risk. To this end, the present study explored demographic, psychosocial, and behavioral factors related to adherence among 43 Southern, predominately Black, men who have sex with men (MSM). During the study months, 46% of the sample reported being nonadherent to PrEP. Those with more sexual partners (p = .05), greater self-efficacy for taking PrEP (p = .03), and those who felt condoms were less important (p = .02), were more likely to be adherent to PrEP at six-month follow-up. Further interventions that consider perceived sexual risk, condom use, and adherence self-efficacy are needed to improve PrEP adherence among Southern MSM.

Goals-of-care decision aid for critically ill patients with TBI: Development and feasibility testing.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and demonstrate early feasibility of a goals-of-care decision aid for surrogates of patients who are critically ill with traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) that meets accepted international decision aid guidelines. METHODS: We developed the decision aid in 4 stages: (1) qualitative study of goals-of-care communication and decision needs of 36 stakeholders of ciTBI (surrogates and physicians), which informed (2) development of paper-based decision aid with iterative revisions after feedback from 52 stakeholders; (3) acceptability and usability testing in 18 neurologic intensive care unit (neuroICU) family members recruited from 2 neuroICU waiting rooms using validated scales; and (4) open-label, randomized controlled feasibility trial in surrogates of ciTBI. We performed an interim analysis of 16 surrogates of 12 consecutive patients who are ciTBI to confirm early feasibility of the study protocol and report recruitment, participation, and retention rates to date. RESULTS: The resultant goals-of-care decision aid achieved excellent usability (median System Usability Scale 87.5 [possible range 0-100]) and acceptability (97% graded the tool's content as "good" or "excellent"). Early feasibility of the decision aid and the feasibility trial protocol was demonstrated by high rates of recruitment (73% consented), participation (100%), and retention (100% both after the goals-of-care clinician-family meeting and at 3 months) and complete data for the measurements of all secondary decision-related and behavioral outcomes to date. CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic development process resulted in a novel goals-of-care decision aid for surrogates of patients who are ciTBI with excellent usability, acceptability, and early feasibility in the neuroICU environment, and meets international decision aid standards. This methodology may be a development model for other decision aids in neurology to promote shared decision-making.

Should We Use the IMPACT-Model for the Outcome Prognostication of TBI Patients? A Qualitative Study Assessing Physicians' Perceptions.

Introduction. Shared Decision-Making may facilitate information exchange, deliberation, and effective decision-making, but no decision aids currently exist for difficult decisions in neurocritical care patients. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards, a framework for the creation of high-quality decision aids (DA), recommends the presentation of numeric outcome and risk estimates. Efforts are underway to create a goals-of-care DA in critically-ill traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) patients. To inform its content, we examined physicians' perceptions, and use of the IMPACT-model, the most widely validated ciTBI outcome model, and explored physicians' preferences for communicating prognostic information towards families. Methods. We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews in 20 attending physicians (neurosurgery,neurocritical care,trauma,palliative care) at 7 U.S. academic medical centers. We used performed qualitative content analysis of transcribed interviews to identify major themes. Results. Only 12 physicians (60%) expressed awareness of the IMPACT-model; two stated that they "barely" knew the model. Seven physicians indicated using the model at least some of the time in clinical practice, although none used it exclusively to derive a patient's prognosis. Four major themes emerged: the IMPACT-model is intended for research but should not be applied to individual patients; mistrust in the IMPACT-model derivation data; the IMPACT-model is helpful in reducing prognostic variability among physicians; concern that statistical models may mislead families about a patient's prognosis. Discussion: Our study identified significant variability of the awareness, perception, and use of the IMPACT-model among physicians. While many physicians prefer to avoid conveying numeric prognostic estimates with families using the IMPACT-model, several physicians thought that they "ground" them and reduce prognostic variability among physicians. These findings may factor into the creation and implementation of future ciTBI-related DAs.

What Families Need and Physicians Deliver: Contrasting Communication Preferences Between Surrogate Decision-Makers and Physicians During Outcome Prognostication in Critically Ill TBI Patients.

BACKGROUND: Surrogate decision-makers ("surrogates") and physicians of incapacitated patients have different views of prognosis and how it should be communicated, but this has not been investigated in neurocritically ill patients. We examined surrogates' communication preferences and physicians' practices during the outcome prognostication for critically ill traumatic brain injury (ciTBI) patients in two level-1 trauma centers and seven academic medical centers in the USA. METHODS: We used qualitative content analysis and descriptive statistics of transcribed interviews to identify themes in surrogates (n = 16) and physicians (n = 20). RESULTS: The majority of surrogates (82%) preferred numeric estimates describing the patient's prognosis, as they felt it would increase prognostic certainty, and limit the uncertainty perceived as frustrating. Conversely, 75% of the physicians reported intentionally omitting numeric estimates during prognostication meetings due to low confidence in family members' abilities to appropriately interpret probabilities, worry about creating false hope, and distrust in the accuracy and data quality of existing TBI outcome models. Physicians felt that these models are for research only and should not be applied to individual patients. Surrogates valued compassion during prognostication discussions, and acceptance of their goals-of-care decision by clinicians. Physicians and surrogates agreed on avoiding false hope. CONCLUSION: We identified fundamental differences in the communication preferences of prognostic information between ciTBI patient surrogates and physicians. These findings inform the content of a future decision aid for goals-of-care discussions in ciTBI patients. If validated, these findings may have important implications for improving communication practices in the neurointensive care unit independent of whether a formal decision aid is used.

NOTES: issues and technical details with introduction of NOTES into a small general surgery residency program.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) is a development of recent origin. In 2004, Kalloo et al first described NOTES investigation in an animal model. Since then, several investigators have pursued NOTES study in animal survival and nonsurvival models. Our objectives for this project included studying NOTES intervention in a laboratory environment using large animal (swine) models and learning to do so in a safe, controlled manner. Ultimately, we intend to introduce NOTES methodology into our surgical residency training program. The expertise of an experienced laparoscopic surgeon, fellowship-trained laparoendoscopic surgeon, and veterinarian along with a senior surgical resident was utilized to bring the input of several disciplines to this study. The Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) of Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine and Pharmacy (NEOUCOM/COP) approved this study. METHODS: A series of 5 laboratory sessions using mixed breed farm swine varying in weight from 37 kg to 43.1 kg was planned for the initial phase of NOTES introduction into our residency program. Animals were not kept alive in this investigation. All animals were anesthetized using a standard swine protocol and euthanized following guidelines issued by the American Veterinary Medical Association Panel on Euthanasia. Equipment included a Fujinon EVE endoscope 0.8 cm in diameter with a suction/irrigation channel and one working channel. Initially, a US Endoscopy gastric overtube, 19.5 mm OD and 50 cm in length, was used to facilitate passage of the endoscope. However, this device was found to have insufficient length. Subsequently, commercially available 5/8" diameter clear plastic tubing, 70 cm to 80 cm in length, was adapted for use as an overtube. Standard endoscopic instruments included Boston Scientific biopsy forceps, needle-knife, papillotome, endoscopic clip applier, and Valley Lab electrosurgical unit. A Karl Storz laparoscope and tower were used for laparoscopic observation of NOTES maneuvers. Necropsy was performed to determine specific details of surgical intervention. RESULTS: NOTES intervention is feasible in an animal model. Insight into the potential of NOTES was obtained in this investigation. CONCLUSIONS: NOTES investigation in a controlled, laboratory setting using an animal model proved to have value for our program. A steep learning curve was encountered despite the availability of an investigator familiar with elementary NOTES procedures. The authors strongly suggest investigators adopt the ASGE/SAGES working group recommendations for a multidisciplinary team possessing advanced therapeutic endoscopic and advanced laparoscopic skills to study NOTES before human investigation. Animal laboratory facilities to perform research and training should be available to the multidisciplinary team for exploration of NOTES techniques and procedures. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval must be obtained before introduction of NOTES procedures in human patients.